Hansard

I open the debate by making two preliminary points. First, I declare an interest as a Scottish solicitor and, consequently, a member of the Law Society of Scotland. I draw members' attention to the relevant entry under my name in the Parliament's register of members' interests. Secondly, I acknowledge the co-sponsorship of the bill by Pauline McNeill, Roseanna Cunningham and Donald Gorrie, which signifies the cross-party support that existed for the initial proposal that I made. I am grateful to those members for their support and to all other members who have helped to bring the bill to this point just before the shutters come down on the first session of the Scottish Parliament. The bill is a modest measure and, on the face of it, one of a highly technical nature. However, there lies within it a mechanism to improve significantly the handling of complaints by the Law Society of Scotland. It is by that criterion that I believe that the bill will be judged by the Parliament and the wider public.

The Justice 1 Committee took the lead on the bill with its usual gusto, rigorously examining the bill's principles and provisions and not missing the opportunity that was presented to advance the recommendations that it had made in its report on the inquiry into the regulation of the legal profession in Scotland. The committee took evidence from the Scottish Consumer Council, the Scottish legal services ombudsman, the Minister for Justice and the Law Society of Scotland. I place on record my gratitude to the members of the Justice 1 Committee and its clerks for their diligence and efficiency in the processing of the bill at its previous stages.

I also place on record my thanks to the Scottish Executive for its support of the bill, as indicated by Jim Wallace, the Minister for Justice, at the committee's initial evidence-taking session, and at stage 2 by Hugh Henry, the Deputy Minister for Justice, who is present on behalf of the Executive.

The bill will enable the council of the Law Society of Scotland to delegate or arrange for the discharge of its statutory functions by another person or body. The bill will amend the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 to that effect. No such expressed power of delegation, even to the Law Society's own committees, sub-committees or staff members, is to be found within the 1980 act. The bill will remedy a perceived deficiency in the legislation.

The bill will enable the council to delegate its statutory functions, subject to limited exceptions, and will provide for the appointment of sub-committees in the scheme of the constitution of the council, and the appointment of lay members to committees or sub-committees of the council and, as appropriate, for such lay members to form a majority in the committee or sub-committee to which they have been appointed. Therefore, the bill is empowering rather than prescriptive.

In the stage 1 debate on 9 January, several members sought assurances that the scheme of delegation to be proposed and introduced by the Law Society would be available for parliamentary scrutiny before the bill completed its passage. By the time the bill reached stage 2 on 18 February, a copy of the general principles of the scheme of delegation had been made available to members of the Justice 1 Committee. I am pleased to advise members that specific proposals in relation to the Law Society's handling of complaints have been formulated and sent to the Justice 1 Committee. They are, of course, also available for consultation by any other member of the Parliament.

It would be helpful if I compared the recommendations that the Justice 1 Committee made in its report on the bill with the scheme of delegation for complaints handling that has been devised by the Law Society. First, the committee recommended that there should be at least 50 per cent lay membership of the Law Society's complaints committees. That is now a feature of the scheme. There are at present five client relations committees of 10 members each, 50 per cent of whom will be lay members once the scheme is put into effect. I can also advise members that the Law Society has completed the process of identifying and recruiting additional lay members to serve on those committees.

Secondly, the Justice 1 Committee recommended that an honorarium be paid to lay members, which the Law Society has agreed to. Thirdly, in accordance with the committee's recommendation, all decisions in relation to complaints, whether of misconduct or of inadequate professional service, will be taken by the Law Society's client relations committees rather than by the council. In that context, the decision whether to prosecute a solicitor before the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal, which is itself an independent statutory body, will likewise be taken by a client relations committee rather than by the council.

Fourthly, the committee recommended that there be an oversight committee to ensure consistency in decision making. To that end, the Law Society's client care committee will have an enhanced supervisory role in respect of the client relations committees, to give guidance to them on procedures, ensure consistency of decision making, deal with policy questions that may occasionally arise, oversee the work of staff employed in client relations and ensure adequate training arrangements for committee members on how to discharge their duties, including the preparation of reports by individual committee members for consideration by the committee as a whole.

If the bill is approved by the Parliament, it will come into force one month after receiving royal assent. Meetings of the council of the Law Society are scheduled for both June and July. The consequence is that the new complaints handling system will be in place by the summer, once the final legislative and constitutional hurdles have been cleared.

I also advise members that the committee approved three amendments at stage 2. The first amendment clarified the respective roles of the society's committees and of individuals, whether they be case reporters or case managers, in processing and handling complaints from the public.

The other two amendments were technical and enabled the bill to dovetail with the Public Appointments and Public Bodies etc (Scotland) Act 2003, which transfers the responsibilities of the Scottish Conveyancing and Executry Services Board to the Law Society of Scotland. The amendments were designed to align the complaints system for solicitors with that for conveyancing and executry practitioners.

I commend this short, non-controversial bill to the Parliament.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees that the Council of the Law Society of Scotland Bill be passed.